Talk:Tropolis

A fact from Tropolis appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 24 January 2011 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Tropolis has been called an attempt to "snackify" beverages?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2011/January.

Wikipedia

Food and drink Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Food and Drink task list:

To edit this page, select here

Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink:

Help bring these Top Importance articles currently B Status or below up to GA status: Agaricus bisporus (i.e. mushroom), Beef, Bread, Curry, Drink, Food, Ham and eggs, Soy sauce, Sushi, Yogurt
Bring these Top Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Beer, French cuisine, Sugar
Bring these High Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Apple, Burger King, Fish
Participate in project-related deletion discussions.
Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this.
Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here.
Provide photographs and images for Category:Wikipedia requested images of food
Consider joining this project's Assessment task force. List any project ideas in this section

Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages.

Brands

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Notability[edit]

Two references, albeit from the Dail Mail and the WSJ, do not make this a notable product. – ukexpat (talk) 15:37, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And whoever was collating them seems to think, a bit hilariously, that the paper is called the Daily Mail Reporter, rather than the Daily Mail. (They've obviously read the byline 'Daily Mail Reporter' and assumed that's the name of the paper, when it means 'A reporter from the Daily Mail'.) To me that suggests someone who was just looking for two external references to allow the article to survive an AFD. If you're writing an article properly then you wouldn't base it on an article in a paper you don't even know the name of, but if you're just paying lip-service to WP:V, then hey, here's an article about our drink in some limey paper called the Daily Mail Reporter, thanks Google, that'll do. --86.147.251.177 (talk) 17:48, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I restored the {{notability}} tag; it was removed by the article creator with an argument that, since the article passed through DYK, it must be notable. This isn't an indication of notability; notability is demonstrated by significant coverage in reliable sources, not by Wikipedia-internal processes that the article passed through. Although DYK does sometimes reject articles for notability issues (i.e., AfDing nominations that are not notable), it doesn't always do so, and there is no explicit requirement that articles must uncontroversially meet the notability requirements to pass through DYK; thus, the fact that this article was on DYK doesn't preclude having a discussion about notability. rʨanaɢ (talk) 21:56, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tone[edit]

I restored the {{pressrelease}} tag, which was removed in this edit (with a summary saying, essentially, "of course it reads like a press release, because that's all that's available now"). That doesn't change the fact that parts of the article are written in a promotional tone; we generally don't remove tags just because we're currently unable to correct the issues. (For comparison, no one would remove {{Non-free use rationale}} from a non-free image and say "of course it's non-free, because there's no free alternative available!") rʨanaɢ (talk) 22:17, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Discontinued?[edit]

A decade later, and I cannot find reliable, nay, *any* sources to confirm or deny either the continued existence, or discontinuation of this product. DarkAudit (talk) 04:08, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]